48896 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

following officers have or will be

designated by the Captain of the Port:

the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, the

senior boarding officer on each vessel'

enforcing the safety zone, and the Duty

Officer at Coast Guard Group Portland,

Oregon.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with

the general regulations in Section

165.23 of this part, entry into this zone

is prohibited, unless authonzed by the

Captain of the Port or his designated

representatives.

(d) Effective Dates. This section is

effective on September 20, 1995 at 12

a.m. (PDT), and remains in effect until

November 19, 1995 at 12 p.m. (PST),

unless sooner terminated by the Captain

of the Port.

Dated: August 29, 1995.

C.E. Bills,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the

Port.

JFR Doc. 95-23354 Filed 9-20-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-14-

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL98-2--6840; FRL-6299-3]

Approval and Promulgation of an

Implementation Plan for Vehicle Miles

Traveled; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY, The United States

Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA) is approving a request from

Illinois, for a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision for the Chicago ozone

nonattainment area, which

demonstrates how mobile source

emissions will continue to decline over

the years and not increase. In addition,

Illinois has implemented 127

transportation control measures (TCMsJ

for a total reduction of more than two

tons per day of volatile organic

compounds. Two public comment

letters were received which are

addressed in this rulemaking. This

rulemaking action approves, in final, the

first two requirements of the vehicle

miles traveled (VMT) Offset SIP revision

request and the associated TCMs for

Chicago, Illinois as requested by Illinois.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective on October 23, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location:

Regulation Development Section,

Regulation Development Branch (AR18J), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

Please contact Patricia Morris at (312)

353-8656 before visiting the Region-5

office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia Morris, Regulation

Development Section, Regulation

Development Branch (AR-18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Clean Air

Act, as amended in 1990 (Act), requires

States containing ozone nonattaiment

areas classified as "severe" pursuant to

section 181(a) of the Act to adopt TCMs

and transportation control strategies to

offset any growth in emissions from

growth in VMT or number of vehicle

trips, and to attain reductions in motor

vehicle emissions (in combination with

other emission reduction requirements)

as necessary to comply with the Act's

RFP milestones and attainment

requirements. The requirements for

establishing a VMT Offset program are

discussed in the April 16, 1992, General

Preamble to Title I of the Act (57 FR

13498), in addition to section

182(d)(1)(A) of the Act.

The VMT Offset provision requires

that States submit by November 15,

1992, specific enforceable TCMs and

strategies to offset any growth in

emissions from growth in VMT or

number of vehicle trips sufficient to

allow total area emissions to comply

with the RFP and attainment

requirements of the Act.

As described in the November 2,

1994, proposed rule (see 59 FR 54866,

54867), the USEPA has observed that

these three elements (i.e., offsetting

growth in mobile source emissions,

attainment of the RFP reduction, and

attainment of the ozone National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS)) can be divided into three

separate submissions that could be

submitted on different dates.

Under this approach, the first

element, the emissions offset element,

was due on November 15, 1992. The

USEPA believes this element is not

necessarily dependent on the

development of the other elements. The

State could submit the emissions growth

offset element independent of an

analysis of that element's consistency

with the periodic reduction and

attainment requirements of the Act.

Emissions trends from other sources

need not be considered to show

compliance with this offset requirement.

As submitting this element in isolation

does not implicate the timing problem

of advancing deadlines for RFP and

attainment demonstrations, USEPA does

not believe it is necessary to extend the

statutory deadline for submittal of the

emissions growth offset element.

The second element, which requires

the VMT Offset SIP to comply with the

15 percent RFP requirement of the Act,

was due on November 15, 1993, which

is the same date on which the 15

percent RFP SIP itself was due under

section 182(b)(1) of the Act. The USEPA

believes it is reasonable to extend the

deadline for this element to the date on

which the entire 15 percent SIP was

due, as this allows States to develop the

comprehensive strategy to address the

15 percent reduction requirement and

assure that the TCM elements required

under'section 182(d)(1)(A) are

consistent with the remainder of the 15

percent demonstration. Indeed, USEPA

believes that only upon submittal of the

broader 15 percent plan can a State have

had the necessary opportunity to

coordinate its VMT strategy with its 15

percent plan. The third element, which requires the

VMT Offset SIP to comply with the

post-1996 RFP and attainment

requirements of the Act, was due on

November 15, 1994, the statutory

deadline for those broader submissions.

The USEPA believes it is reasonable to

extend the deadline for this element to

the date on which the post-1996 RFP

and attainment SIPs are due for the

same reasons it is reasonable to extend

the deadline for the second element.

First, it is arguably impossible for a

State to make the showing required by

Section 182(d)(1)(A) for the third

element until the broader

demonstrations have been developed by

the State. Moreover, allowing States to

develop the comprehensive strategy to

address post-1996 RFP and attainment

by providing a fuller opportunity to

assure that the TCM elements comply

with the broader RFP and attainment

demonstrations, will result in a better

program for reducing emissions in the

long term.

On July 14, 1994, Illinois submitted to

USEPA documentation to fulfill the

VMT-Offset SIP A public hearing was

held on June 22, 1994, and

documentation on the public hearing

was submitted to complete the SIP

revision request. The SIP revision was

found to be complete by the USEPA in

a letter dated August 4, 1994. The

USEPA proposed to approve the first

and second element on December 4,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 48897

1994. The public comment period

ended on January 5, 1995, and two

public comment letters were received.

I. Evaluation of the State Submittal

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act

requires the State to offset any growth

in emissions from growth in VMT. As

discussed in the General Preamble, the

purpose is to prevent a growth in motor

vehicle emissions from canceling out

the emission reduction benefits of the

federally mandated programs in the Act.

The USEPA interprets this provision to

require that sufficient measures be

adopted so that projected motor vehicle

volatile organic compound (VOC)

emissions will never be higher during

the ozone season in one year than

during the ozone season in the year

before. When growth in VMT and

vehicle trips would otherwise cause a

motor vehicle emissions upturn, this

upturn must be prevented. The

emissions level at the point of upturn

becomes a ceiling on motor vehicle

emissions. This requirement applies to

projected emissions in the years

between the submission of the SIP

revision and the attainment deadline,

and is above and beyond the separate

requirements for the RFP and the

attainment demonstrations. The ceiling

level is defined, therefore, up to the

point of upturn, as motor vehicle

emissions that would occur in the ozone

season of that year, with VMT growth,

if all measures for that area in that year

were implemented as required by the

Act. When this curve begins to turn up

due to growth in VMT or vehicle trips,

the ceiling becomes a fixed value. The

ceiling line would include the effects of

Federal measures such as new motor

vehicle standards, phase II RVP

controls, and reformulated gasoline, as

well as the Act-mandated SIP

requirements.

The State of Illinois has demonstrated

in its submittal of July 14, 1994, that the

predicted growth in VMT in Chicago,

Illinois, is not expected to result in a

growth in motor vehicle emissions that

will negate the effects of the reductions

mandated by the Act. For this analysis,

Illinois used an average summer

weekday VMT growth rate of 2.7

percent per year between 1990 and

1996. This growth rate is supported by

the ground counts in the Illinois road

file and confirmed by the Illinois

Department of Transportation. Further,

Illinois has projected motor vehicle

emissions to the year 2007 using a 2.7

percent per year growth rate not

withstanding that the most current

socioeconomic data in combination

with the transportation network model

predicts a lower VMT growth rate. The

2.7 percent per year projection does not

predict an upturn in motor vehicle

emissions through the year 2007 In the

event that the projected socioeconomic

data and associated VMT grow more

rapidly than currently predicted, Illinois

is required by Section 182(c)(5) to track

actual VMT starting with 1996 and

every three years thereafter to

demonstrate that the actual VMT is

equal to or less than the projected VMT.

TCMs will be required to offset VMT

that is above the projected levels

(section 182(c)(5)).

Illinois has evaluated the

effectiveness and predicted impact of a

number of TCMs. The TCM evaluation

is documented in the December 9, 1993,

Chicago Area Transportation Study

(CATS) document "Transportation

Control Measures Contribution to the 15

percent Rate of Progress State

Implementation Plan" CATS is the

metropolitan planning organization for

the Chicago metropolitan area. The

December 9, 1993, document (which is

part of the docket for this notice) lists

the TCMs and the emission reduction

calculation methodology Illinois has

implemented TCMs in the Chicago area

and has included TCMs in the 15

percent RFP SIP Today's SIP revision

approval incorporates these TCMs into

the Illinois SIP and requires Illinois to

construct and operate the specified

TCMs that are identified and credited to

meet the 15 percent RFP and post 1996

RFP These TCMs are listed in Table 1.

On March 9, 1995 the Policy Committee

of the Chicago Area Transportation

Study as metropolitan planning

organization for northeastern Illinois,

approved these TCMs for submittal to

the Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency as part of the control strategy

SIP for the Chicago ozone

nonattainment area. There are 127

TCMs that are being incorporated into

the Illinois SIP for an estimated

reduction in volatile organic

compounds of 2.78 tons per day (tpd).

Illinois is using 2.0 tpd to meet the

required 15 percent, and the additional

0.78 tpd will be credited toward the

post 1996 RFP Most of the TCMs (111)

have already been completed and the

remaining TCMs are scheduled to be

completed by the end of 1996. The

vanpool incentive program has been

implemented and the Pace Board (the

project implementor) has committed to

this project for future years.

Illinois has taken credit for

conventional TCMs such as signal

interconnects, additional commuter

parking, vanpool programs and transit

improvements which include station

improvements and new rapid transit

service to Midway Airport. The specific

projects are listed in Table 1. In

addition, Illinois has implemented a

number of TCMs that are expected to

benefit air quality such as bicycle and

pedestrian projects that will help

eliminate trips. At this time, however,

Illinois is not taking a reduction credit

for these projects since a methodology

for determining the emission reduction

credit is not firmly established and

additional studies of the effectiveness of

these projects are being conducted.

Illinois may take credit for these

projects at a later date. Because Illinois

is not taking credit at this time, these

projects are not currently being

approved as part of this SIP revision

request.

illinois submitted a 15 percent RFP

SIP for the Chicago area to the USEPA

in November 1993, but the submittal

was found incomplete in a letter dated

January 21, 1994. The RFP SIP lacked

enforceable regulations.

On May 23, 1995, Illinois submitted

materials to supplement the 15 percent

RFP plan. This submittal finalized

Illinois' 15 percent SIP The USEPA

found Illinois' submitted 15 percent SIP

complete on June 15, 1995. The SIP

submission contains a menu of adopted

emissions reductions measures that the

State believes will achieve the 15

percent reduction requirement by

November 15, 1996. In the submission,

Illinois uses TCMs for a reduction credit

of 2 tpd. For the attainment demonstration and

post-1996 RFP SIPs, which Illinois

submitted on November 22, 1994 and

May 23, 1995, USEPA is still in the

process of evaluating these SIP

submission.

Illinois has met the first and second

elements of the VMT offset SIP

requirements of section 182(d)(1)(A).

Regarding the first element, Illinois has

identified and evaluated TCMs to

reduce VMT and has shown that VMT

growth will not result in a growth of

motor vehicle emissions that will negate

the effects of the reductions required

under the Act and that there will not be

an upturn of motor vehicle emissions.

Regarding the second element, Illinois

has submitted a complete 15 percent SIP

that relies upon TCMs for 2 tpd to make

its proffered showing that the 15 percent

reduction will be achieved. These TCMs

will be approved into tre Illinois SIP

effective with this final rule.

Consequently USEPA does not believe

it is necessary to delay taking action on

this second element of the VMT SIP

and that the Agency can at this point

rely upon Illinois's submitted 15

percent SIP to satisfy the second VMT

SIP element. However, if in evaluating

the 15 percent SIP for approval it is
48898 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

determined that Illinois will in fact need

to implement additional measures to

meet the 15 percent RFP requirement,

and a subsequent submission of a

revised 15 percent SIP is required, EPA

would have to reevaluate its approval of

the second element of the VMT SIP

The third requirement is for Illinois to

use TCMs as necessary to attain the

standard. This third requirement will be

applicable if Illinois incorporates TCMs

into its attainment plan through any

future SIP revisions.

III. Public Comments

On December 6, 1994, the USEPA

proposed to approve the first and

second elements of the Illinois VMT

Offset SIP and requested public

comment. The public comment period

closed on January 5, 1995, and 2 sets of

comments were received. The Natural

Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

submitted comments and the

Environmental Law and Policy Center

submitted comments for themselves and

the following groups: the American

Lung Association of Metropolitan

Chicago; Business and Professional

People for the Public Interest; the Center

for Neighborhood Technology- the

Chicagoland Bicycle Federation; and the

Sierra Club, Illinois Chapter. The

following summarizes the comments

and USEPA's response to these

comments:

Comment: Commenters argue that the

Act requires TCMs to offset emissions

resulting from all growth in VMT above

1990 levels, and USEPA is required by

the Act to ensure emission reductions

despite an increase in VMT. The

legislative history states that "[tihe

baseline for determining whether there

has been a growth in emissions due to

increased VMT is the level of vehicle

emissions that would occur if VMT held

constant in the year." See H. Rep. No.

101-490 Part I, 101st Cong., 2nd session

at 242, and S. Rep. No. 101-228, 101st

Cong., 1st Sess. at 44.

Response: As discussed in the General

Pteamble, USEPA believes that section

182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires the State

to "offset any growth in emissions"

from growth in VMT but not, as

suggested by the comment, all emissions

resulting from VMT growth (see 57 FR

13498, 13522-13523, April 16, 1992).

The purpose is to prevent a growth in

motor vehicle emissions from canceling

out the emission reduction benefits of

the federally mandated programs in the

Act. The baseline for emissions is the

1990 level of vehicle emissions and the

subsequent reductions in emission

levels required to reach attainment.

Thus, the anticipated benefits from the

mandated measures such as the Federal

motor vehicle pollution control

program, lower reid vapor pressure,

enhanced inspection and maintenance

and all other motor vehicle emission

control programs are included in the

ceiling line calculation used by Illinois

in the VMT Offset SIP Table 2 in the

Illinois submittal shows how emissions

will decline substantially from 491.2

tons per day (tpd) in 1990 to 151.4 tpd

in 2007 (assuming a 2.7 percent per year

VMT growth rate) and will not begin to

turn up. Emission reductions are

expected every year through the year

2007

The ceiling line approach does not

"tolerate increases in traffic of a

magnitude that would wipe out the air

quality gains" as suggested by the

comment. In fact, the ceiling line level

decreases from year to year as the State

implements various control measures

and the decreasing ceiling line prevents

an upturn in mobile source emissions.

Dramatic increases in VMT that could

wipe out the benefits of motor vehicle

emission reduction measures will not be

allowed and will trigger the

implementation of TCMs. This prevents

mere preservation of the status quo, and

ensures emissions reductions despite an

increase in VMT such that the rate of

emissions decline is not slowed by

increases in VMT or number of trips. To

prevent future growth changes from

adversely impacting emissions from

motor vehicles, Illinois is required by

section 182(c)(5) to track actual VMT

starting with 1996 and every three years

thereafter to demonstrate that the actual

VMT is equal to or less than the

projected VMT. TCMs will be required

to offset VMT that is above the projected

levels (section 182(c)(5)).

Under the commenter's approach to

section 182(d)(1)(A), Illinois would have

to offset VMT growth even while

vehicle emissions are declining.

Although the statutory language could

be read to require offsetting any, VMT

growth, JSEPA believes that the

language can also be read so that only

actual emissions increases resulting

from VMT growth need to be offset. The

statute by its own terms requires

offsetting of "any growth in emissions

from growth in VMT "It is reasonable

to interpret this language as requiring

that VMT growth must be offset only

where such growth results in emissions

increases from the motor vehicle fleet in

the area.

While it is true that the language of

the legislative history appears to

support the commenter's interpretation

of the statutory language, such an

interpretation would have drastic

implications for Illinois if the State were

forced to ignore the beneficial impacts

of all vehicle tailpipe and alternative

fuel controls. Although the original

authors of the provision and the

legislative history may in fact have

intended this result, USEPA does not

believe that the Congress as a whole, or

even the full House of Representatives,

believed at the time it voted to pass the

1990 Amendments to the Act that the

words of this provision would impose

such severe restrictions.

Given the susceptibility of the

statutory language to these two

alternative interpretations, USEPA

believes it is the Agency's role in

administering the statute to take the

interpretation most reasonable in light

of the practical implications of such

interpretation and the purposes and

intent of the statutory scheme as a

whole. In the context of the intricate

planning requirements Congress

established in title I to bring areas

towards attainment of the ozone

NAAQS, and in light of the absence of

any discussion of this aspect of the VMT

offset provision by the Congress as a

whole (either in floor debate or in the

Conference Report), USEPA concludes

that the appropriate interpretation of

section 182(d)(1)(A) requires offsetting

VMT growth only when such growth

would result in actual emissions

increases.

Comment: Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the

Act requires that emissions of oxides of

nitrogen (NOx) as well as VOCs

resulting from VMT growth must be

offset.

Response: USEPA disagrees with the

commenter's interpretation that section

182(d)(1)(A) requires NOx emissions

from VMT growth to be offset. While

that section provides that "any growth

in emissions" from growth in VMT must

be offset, USEPA believes that Congress

clearly intended that the offset

requirement be limited to VOC

emissions. First, section 182(d)(1)(A)'s

requirement that a State's VMT TCMs

comply with the "periodic emissions

reduction requirements" of sections

182(b) and (c) the Act indicates that the

VMT offset SIP requirement is VOC

specific. Section 182(c)(2)(B), which

requires reasonable further progress

demonstrations for serious ozone

nonattainment areas, provides that such

demonstrations will result in VOC

emissions reductions; thus, the only "periodic emissions reduction

requirement" of section 182(c)(2)(B) is

VOC-specific. In fact, it is only in

section 182(c)(2)(C)-a provision not

referenced in section 182(d)(1)(A)-that

Congress provided States the authority

to submit demonstrations providing for

reductions of emissions of VOCs and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 48899

NOx in lieu of the SIP otherwise

required by section 182(c)(2)(B).

Moreover, the 15 percent periodic

reduction requirement of section

182(b)(1)(A)(i) applies only to VOC

emissions, while only the separate "annual" reduction requirement applies

to both VOC and NOx emissions.

USEPA believes that Congress did not

intend the terms "periodic emissions

reductions" and "annual emissions

reductions" to be synonymous, and that

the former does not include the latter.

In section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act,

Congress required that conformity SIPs "contribute to annual emissions

reductions" consistent with section

182(b)(1) (and thus achieve NOx

emissions reductions), but does not refer

to the 15 percent periodic reduction

requirement. Conversely, section

182(d)(1)(A) refers to the periodic

emissions reduction requirements of the

Act, but does not refer to annual

emissions reduction requirements that

require NOx reductions. Consequently

USEPA interprets the requirement that

VMT SIPs comply with periodic

emissions reduction requirements of the

Act to mean that only VOC emissions

are subject to section 182(d)(1)(A) in

severe ozone nonattainment areas.

Finally, USEPA notes that where

Congress intended section 182 ozone

SIP reqirements to apply to NOx as

well as VOC emissions, it specifically

extended applicability to NOx. Thus,

references to ozone or emissions in

general in section 182 do not on their

own implicate NOx. For example, in

section 182(a)(2)(C), the Act requires

States to require preconstruction

permits for new or modified stationary

sources "with respect to ozone"

Congress clearly did not believe this

reference to ozone alone was sufficient

to subject NOx emissions to the

permitting requirement, since it was

necessary to enact section 182(f)(1) of

the Act, which specifically extends the

permitting requirement to major

stationary sources of NOx. Since section

182(d)(1)(A) does not specifically

identify NOx emissions requirements in

addition to the VOC emissions

requirements identified in the

provision, USEPA does not believe

States are required to offset NOx

emissions from VMT growth in their

section 182(d)(1)(A) SIPs.

IV Final Rulemalng Action

Based on the State's submittal request

and in consideration of the public

comments received in response to the

proposed rule, USEPA is approving the

SIP revision submitted by the State of

Illinois as satisfying the first two of the

three VMT offset plan requirements.

The USEPA is also approving into the

Illinois SIP 127 TCMs creditable to the

15_percent and post 1996 RFP

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as

revised by a July 10, 1995 memorandum

from Mary Nichols, Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation.

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP Each

request for revision to any SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, USEPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Act do not

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SiP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-state relationship under the Act,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The Act

forbids USEPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds. See

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256-66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

("Unfunded Mandates Act"), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, the USEPA

must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any proposed

or final rule that includes a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate; or to the

private sector, of $100 million or more.

Under Section 205, the USEPA must

select the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

Section 203 requires the USEPA to

establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

The USEPA has determined that the

approval action promulgated today does

not include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector.

This Federal action approves preexisting requirements under State or

local law, and imposes no new Federal

requirements. Accordingly no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector,

result from this action.

Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by November 20, 1995. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (see Section

307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Ozone,

Transportation control measures,

Vehicle miles traveled offset.

Dated: August 31, 1995.

Valdas V Adainkus,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52-[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart 0-IIlinois

2. Section 52.726 is amended by

adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

§ 52.726 Control Strategy: Ozone

(j) Approval-On July 14, 1994,

Illinois submitted two of three elements

required by section 182(d)(1)(A) of the

Clean Air Amendments of 1990 to be

incorporated as part of the vehicle miles
48900 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

traveled (VMT) State Implementation transportation control measures (TCMs) increase in emissions would take place.

Plan intended to offset any growth in required as part of Illinois' 15 percent Illinois satisfied the second requirement

emissions from a growth in vehicle reasonable further progress (RFP) plan by submitting the TCMs listed in Table

miles traveled; These elements are the which was due November 15, 1993. 1 which are now approved into the

offsetting of growth in emissions Illinois satisfied the first requirement by Illinois SIP

attributable to growth in VMT which projecting emissions from mobile

was due November 15, 1992, and, sources and demonstrating that no

TABLE 1

Project type Location description Completion SIP credit

status VOC tpd

RS/SIG MOD .................................................... Madison Street (Western Ave. to Halsted Street) ................................ Done ......... 0.015400

SIG COORD ..................................................... Willow Road (Landwer Road to Shermer) ............................................ Awarded ... 0.052000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Rand Road (Baldwin Road to Kennicott) .............................................. Awarded ... 0.052000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Northwest Hwy (Potter Road to Cumberland Avenue) ......................... Awarded ... 0.030000

SIGS/SIG COORD ........................................... 159th Street (US 45 to 76th Ave & at 91st Avenue) ............................ Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Harlem Ave. (71st St. to 92nd) ............................................................. Awarded ... 0.052000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Harlem Ave. (99th Street to 135th St.) ................................................. Awarded ... 0.052000

RECONST/SIGS/LTS ....................................... Archer Ave. (88th Ave to 65th St.) ........................................................ Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Ogden Ave. (N. Aurora Road to Naper Boulevard) .............................. Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... North Ave. (Tyler to Kautz) ............................................ ......... Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Higgens Road (11 72 at II 31) ............................ ................. Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Sheridan Road (11 173 to Wadsworth) .................................................. Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Lagrange Road (Belmont to Lake St.) .................................................. Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Dundee Road (Sanders Road to Skokie Valley Road) ........................ Awarded ... 0.052000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Dundee Road (Buffalo Grove Road to II 21) ........................................ Awarded ... 0.030000

INT IMP/SIG COORD ....................................... Golf Road (E. River Road to Washington Ave.) ................................... Awarded ... 0.052000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Golf Road (Barrington to Roselle Road) ............................................... Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Higgins Road (Barrmngton to Roselle Road) ......................................... Awarded ... 0.030000

SIG COORD ..................................................... Joe Orr Road (Vincennes Ave. to 11 1) ................................................. Awarded ... 0.030000

TABLE 1

1 Completion IP rei

Project type Location description C pstatus SP

SIG COORD/RS .............................................

SIG COORD ...................................................

SIG COORD ................................................... SIG COORD ................................................... SIG COORD ...................................................

SIG COORD ................................................... SIG CONN ...................................................... SIG CONN ......................................................

SIG CONN ......................................................

SIG CONN ...................................................... SIG CONN ......................................................

SIG CONN ......................................................

SIG CONN ......................................................

SIG CONN ......................................................

RS/INT IMP ....................................................

INT IMP ..........................................................

INT IMP ..........................................................

RS/SIG MOD/INT IMP .................................... ADD TURN LANES ........................................

SERVICE IMP ................................................

SIG INTCONN ................................................

SIG INTCONN ................................................

ENGR .............................................................

SIG INTCONN ................................................

SIG INTCONN ................................................ SIG INTCONN ................................................

Vanpool Program (94 vehicles) ......................

Transp. Center ................................................

Transp. Center ................................................ Station .............................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Crawford Ave. (93rd Street to 127th Street) .....................................

IL 53 (Briarcliff to South of 1-55) ......................................................

Ogden Ave. (Oakwood Avenue to Fairview Avenue) .......................

US 14 (Rohlwing Road to W ilke Road) ............................................

US 30 (At Cottage Grove, Ellis St) ...................................................

IL 53 (Modonough to M ills) ...............................................................

Ogden Ave. (IL 43 to 31st Street) ....................................................

US 12 (Long Grove- Hicks Road) ...................................................

North Ave. (Oak Park to Ridgeland) .................................................

Roosevelt Road (W estchester BI--IL 43) .........................................

Depster St (Keeler to Crawford Ave.) ...............................................

Arlington Hgts Rd. (Thomas to Central) ...........................................

Palatine Rd. (Shoenbeck to W olf Roads) .........................................

W estern Ave. (US 30- Lakewood) ................................................ ,.

North Ave. (1-290 to IL 43) ...............................................................

Plum Grove Rd. (At Higgins Road) ..................................................

St Street (At Illinois) ..........................................................................

Illinois/Grand (Kingsbury to Lake Shore Drive) ................................

York Rd. (Industrial to Grand Ave.) ..................................................

SW Route Lane Service ...................................................................

W ashington Street .............................................................................

IL 59 ..................................................................................................

Citywide--Naperville .........................................................................

W ashington Street .............................................................................

Lewis Ave. (Yorkhousse to ILL 173) .................................................

Schaumberg Rd. (Baington to Martingale) .....................................

Region-W ide Suburban .....................................................................

North W est Cook County ..................................................................

Sears T.F .........................................................................................

Clark/Lake .........................................................................................

18 Th Douglas Line ...........................................................................

Linden ............................................... ...................................... .

Cottage Grove ...................................................................................

ibsle ...................................................................................................

Jefferson Park ...................................................................................

Edison Park .......................................................................................

Palatine .............................................................................................

Awarded

Done

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Done

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Awarded

Done

Done

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

0.052000

0.030000

0.019000

0.030000

0.030000

0.030000

0.013000

0.055200

0.007000

0.137000

0.010000

0.044000

0.042500

0.018900

0.056100

0.010700

0.002700

0.004200

0.003800

0.005516

0.030370

0.068650

0.086230

0.008230

0.034600

0.078080

0.134000

0.032835

0.005805

0.010000

0.001500

0.001500

0.001300

0.010177

0.000110

0.003614

0.004336
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 48901

TABLE 1-Continued

Completion I credit Project type Location description status

Com . Pkg ...................................................

Com . Pkg ...................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................ Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Rideshare Prog ...............................................

Rapid Transit Service .....................................

Transp. Center ................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Station Recon .................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Com. Pkg ........................................................

Com . Pkg ........................................................

Central Street ....................................................................................

Palatine .............................................................................................

Crystal Lake ...................................................................................... 137Th/Riverdale ................................................................................

River Forest ....................................................................................... 115Th/Kensington ............................................................................. 119Th St ............................................................................................

W ilmette ............................................................................................

111Th St ............................................................................................ Edison Park .......................................................................................

Joliet .................................................................................................. Hanover Park .................................................................................... Bartlett ............................................................................................... Chicago Ridge ................................................................................... 103 Rd St .......................................................................................... Elmhurst ............................................................................................ Bartlett ............................................................................................... Morton Grove ....................................................................................

Palatine ............................................................................................. Harvard ..............................................................................................

W illow Spnngs ................................................................................... Edgebrook ......................................................................................... Bensenville ........................................................................................ Hanover Park .................................................................................... Midlothian ..........................................................................................

Route 59 ............................................................................................ Lake Forest (W est) ........................................................................... Lombard ............................................................................................ Elmhurst ............................................................................................ W oodstock .........................................................................................

University Park .................................................................................. Grayslake .......................................................................................... Oak Forest ........................................................................................ 91 St St ......................................................................

Lockport ............................................................................................. Ravenswood ...................................................................................... Hickory Creek .................................................................................... Cary ........................................................................

Blue Island ........................................................................................ Lemont ............................................................................................... Itasca ................................................................................................. Maywood ........................................................................................... Ivanhoe ......................................................................

Ravinia .............................................................................................. Fox River Grove ................................................................................ Medinah ............................................................................................. Hanover Park .................................................................................... W orth ................................................................................................. Roselle .............................................................................................. Crystal Lake ...................................................................................... Gresham ............................................................................................ Barrington .......................................................................................... Regnonwide ........................................................................................ Midway Airport ..................................................................................

Deerfield Lake-Cook ......................................................................... Davis St .............................................................................................

Addison ............................................................................................. King Dnve .......................................................................................... W ashington/W ells ..............................................................................

Cary ........................................................................

Morton Grove .................................................................................... 80th Ave ............................................................................................ Round Lake ...................................................................

Grayslake .......................................................................................... Ingleside ............................................................................................

Schamburg ........................................................................................ Oak Forest ........................................................................................ Lake Cook ......................................................................................... Grayslake ..........................................................................................

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Scheduled

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Done

Scheduled

Done

Done

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

Scheduled

0.000519

0.004890

0.034948

0.004565

0.000289

0.002795

0.004483

0.001587

0.000507

0.002371

0.003967

0.021799

0.008911

0.002159

0.000675

0.003857

0.009326

0.001444

0.003598

0.006299

0.001200

0.002240

0.002010

0.015020

0.002570

0.025020

0.013780

0.001010

0.019000

0.019950

0.006210

0.004260

0.003380

0.007360

0.000130

0.060140

0.005980

0.019430

0.016200

0.003860

0.000600

0.001960

0.003210

0.025170

0.012250

0.011840

0.003530

0.007710

0.015050

0.000300

0.002420

0.040000

0.220000

0.004160

0.004000

0.004000

0.003000

0.003000

0.027910

0.002460

0.043200

0.015150

0.009170

0.005430

0.042090

0.004680

0.026390

0.035290
48902 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 183 / Thursday September 21, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

[FR Doc. 95-23472 Filed 9-20-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-"P

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-6300-]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List Update

AGENCY- Environmental Protection

Agency

ACTION: Notice of deletion of a site from

the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY, The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) announces the deletion of

NAS Whidbey Seaplane Base, located

on Whidbey Island, Washington from

the National Priorities List (NPL). The

NPL is Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300

which is the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of

the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.

EPA and the State of Washington have

determined that no further cleanup

under CERCLA is appropriate and that

the selected remedy has been protective

of public health, welfare and the

environment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 21, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

R. Matthew Wilkening, Site Manager,

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 10, 1200 6th Avenue,

HW-124, Seattle, WA 98101, (206)

553-1284.

Engineering Field Activity NW

(primary Admin. Record location)

Naval Facilities Engineering

Command, 19917 7th Ave. Poulsbo,

Washington

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to

be deleted from the NPL is NAS

Whidbey Seaplane, Whidbey Island,

Washington.

A Notice of Intent to Delete for this

site was published July 17 1995 in

Federal Register [60 FR 36770]. The

closing date for comments on the Notice

of Intent to Delete was August 31, 1995.

EPA received no comments.

EPA identifies sites which appear to

present a significant risk to public

health, welfare, or the environment and

it maintains the NPL as the list of those

sites. Any site deleted from the NPL

remains eligible for remedial actions in

the unlikely event that conditions at the

site warrant such action in the future.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not

affect responsible party liability or

impede Agency efforts to recover costs

associated with response efforts.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous

substances, Hazardous waste,

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,

Reporting and record keeping

requirements, Superfund, Water

pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: September 12, 1995.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator, USEPA Region 10.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended

as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 300

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.

9601-9657' E.O. 12777 56 FR 54757 3 CFR,

1991 Comp. p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923,

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

2. Table 2 of Appendix B to part 300

is amended by removing the site NAS

Whidbey Seaplane Base, Whidbey

Island, Washington.

,[FR Doc. 95-23438 Filed 9-20-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P

40 CFR Part 799

[OPPTS-421 11 F FRL 4927-8]

RIN NO. 2070-AB94

Withdrawal of Certain Testing

Requirements for Office of Water

Chemicals

AGENCY- Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY* EPA is amending the final test

rule for the Office of Water Chemicals

by rescinding the 90-day subchronic

testing requirement for 1,1,2,2-

tetrachloroethane and the 90-day and

14-day testing requirements for 1,1-

dichloroethane. The testing

requirements are being rescinded

because the Agency has received data

adequate to meet the data needs for

which the test rule was promulgated.

DATES: This amendment shall become

effective on November 6, 1995. In

accordance with 40 CFR 23.5, this rule

shall be promulgated for purposes of

judicial review at 1 p.m. eastern

(daylight or standard as appropriate)

time on October 5, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan B. Hazen, Director,

Environmental Assistance Division

(7408), Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 554-1404,

TDD (202) 554-0551, Internet address:

TSCA-Hotline@epamail.epa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is

amending the final test rule for the

Office of Water Chemicals in 40 CFR

799.5075 by rescinding; (1) the 90-day

subchronic testing requirement for

1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, (2) the 90-day

testing requirements for 1,1-

dichloroethane, and (3) the 14-day

testing requirements for 1,1-

dichloroethane.

I. Background

In the Federal Register of April 10,

1995 (60 FR 18079), EPA proposed

rescinding the 90-day subchronic

testing requirement for 1,1,2,2-

tetrachloroethane and the 90-day and

14-day testing requirements for 1,1-.

dichloroethane. The rule establishing

these testing requirements was

promulgated pursuant to TSCA section

4(a), and published in the Federal

Register on November 10, 1993 (58 FR

59667).

The reasons for the proposal were that

data had become available for these

substances which, after review by EPA,

were adjudged to be adequate to meet

the data needs for which the test rule for

these substances was promulgated, the

establishment of Health Advisories for

the Office of Water. The final test rule

for Drinking Water Contaminants

Subject to Testing ("the Office of Water

Chemicals test rule") which EPA is now

amending, is codified in 40 CFR

799.5075.

II. Public Comments

EPA received only one public

comment during the public comment

period. This comment, from the ODW

Chemicals Task Force of Washington,

D.C., agreed with the Agency proposal.

II. Amended Testing Requirements

The Office of Water Chemicals test

rule at 40 CFR 799.5075 is amended to

delete the 90-day subchronic testing

requirement for 1,1,2,2-

tetrachloroethane and the 14-day and

90-day testing requirements for 1,1-

dichloroethane. Specifically, parties

subject to the test rule will no longer

have to comply with 40 CFR

799.5075(a)(1), (c)(1)(i)(A) and

(c)(2)(i)(A).

IV Economic Analysis

Eliminating these testing

requirements will reduce testing costs.

Therefore, this amendment should not

cause adverse economic impact.